Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add support for matching wildcard server certificates to the new
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add support for matching wildcard server certificates to the new |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200811290008.42720.peter_e@gmx.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add support for matching wildcard server certificates to the new (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add support for matching wildcard
server certificates to the new
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Friday 28 November 2008 17:13:54 Magnus Hagander wrote: > Matching *only* as the first character will make it impossible to make > certificates for "www*.domain.com", which is AFAIK fairly popular - and > one of the examples you'll find on CA sites. But it would be fairly easy > to add this restriction if people feel that's a better way. Are there actual technical or administrative or security arguments for or against this? For example, what are the criteria one has to fulfill in order to get such a certificate? Or is there a "defensive certification" security line of reasoning? Now certificate issuing is a real business, so we need to play in that context as well, but I would like to dig a little deeper why things should be done in a certain way. I am quite confortable, for example, with * matching subdomains, because if I own example.com, then I can create any level of subdomain I want, without making a real difference to user/client program. But then I don't really get the point of having * inside of words -- would "www*.domain.com" also match dots then?
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: